It breaks my heart to see whats happening here, lamented 47-year-old Utah native Alex Segura to THE NEW AMERICAN. For more than 10 years, Segura resided in California, watching in disbelief as large portions of that state were effectively reclaimed by Mexico through rampant illegal immigration. Now Im seeing the same thing happening here, he observes. We see very militant people, allied with the Mexican government, and supported by political leaders in this country, ignoring our borders and defying our laws.

For Segura, a third-generation American of Mexican ancestry, La Reconquista (the re-conquest of the American Southwest, or Aztlan, by Mexico) has offered more than a few ironies. When we were living in San Clemente, my then-teenage son tried to get a job at one of the local restaurants, he recounts. There were some very well-paying jobs in the area, but almost all of them were at restaurants owned by illegal aliens. In order to work there, my son was expected, in essence, to become a Mexican. On several occasions he came home very discouraged after being told that he wasnt Mexican enough for a would-be employer, who in many instances was here illegally.

After moving back to Utah, it just amazed me to learn that illegal immigrants could get drivers licenses, Segura continues. This started back in 1999, and I simply couldnt figure out how that happened. And in Ogden and Salt Lake City I began to notice many of the same things I had seen back in California, such as large groups of illegal immigrant men just loitering around. Many of them are genuinely interested in working and are willing to work hard. But many others end up committing serious crimes, in addition to the crime they committed by violating our immigration laws. In California, the unchecked tide of illegals had led to overburdened classrooms, hospitals, and jails  and Segura began to notice similar symptoms afflicting Utah as well.

Segura points out that many, if not most, of the people from my background here support our laws and want to see them respected. I know many Hispanic Utahns, people who were born here or came here legally, who desperately want to get immigration under control. The very visible activities of the illegal alien lobby here tend to put law-abiding Hispanics in a very bad light. And some of them [the law-abiding Latino citizens] have been intimidated by militants, including agents of the Mexican government.

After moving back to Utah several years ago, Segura founded a grass-roots activist group called the Utah League of Citizens for Immigration Reform. The great-grandson of Mexicans who legally immigrated to the United States, and the son of a Mexican-American who enlisted in the U.S. Air Force, Segura is proud of his heritage. This is why he was amazed when the Mexican government publicly accused him and his allies of inciting hatred against Mexicans.

Their supposed offense was to support House Bill 109 (HB 109), a measure making it more difficult for illegal aliens to obtain drivers licenses in Utah. Thanks to opposition from the Republican Partys leadership and the direct intervention of the Mexican government, HB 109 was defeated. Remarkable as it is on its face, this episode is all the more valuable as a case study of the increasing brazenness with which the Mexican government is interfering in U.S. politics as part of a campaign of demographic warfare against our country.

Consular Interference

HB 109 would have required an applicant for a state drivers license to have a Social Security number or other proof of legal residence. This would counteract a key element of the Mexican governments ongoing campaign to entrench illegal immigrants in this country by issuing matricula consular cards  a nonsecure, easily counterfeited document issued by Mexican consulates to Mexicans without regard to their immigration status. (Segura himself, who has never lived in Mexico, learned he could obtain one with little difficulty.)

In 1999, Utah became the first state to accept the matricula cards for the purpose of issuing drivers licenses. Since then, thanks to pressure from both Mexico and Washington, many other state and municipal governments have begun to accept the spurious Mexican document as a legitimate identification, allowing countless illegal aliens to embed themselves in this country and tap into various welfare programs (such as Medicaid and Food Stamps).

On February 26, the Mexican consul general in Salt Lake City, Patricia Deluera, called a press conference at the state Capitol to condemn the measure. I am very concerned that the relationship between Utah and Mexico will be damaged if HB 109 succeeds, she declared. This bill promotes hatred against the Mexican people. Delueras comments were echoed by Joe Reyna, who was identified by the Associated Press as a foreign adviser to President Vicente Fox of Mexico. Specifically targeting a group called Utahns For Immigration Reform and Enforcement (UFIRE), Reyna pronounced: This group [has] one objective in mind, and one only  to promote hatred against the Mexican people living in the state of Utah.

UFIRE founder Matt Throckmorton, a former state legislator who is running for Congress against Chris Cannon (R-Utah), describes the groups objectives quite differently. We dont hate anybody, and dont promote hatred in any form, he told THE NEW AMERICAN. It shouldnt be considered hateful or even controversial for a group of law-abiding citizens, including many from a Hispanic background, to defend the integrity of our laws and borders. And its outrageous  not to mention a violation of diplomatic procedures  for the consulate of a foreign nation to interfere in our states political process, and vilify Utah citizens who are working to see that our laws are respected.

Particularly galling to Throckmorton and many other Utah immigration reform activists is the role played by Joe Reyna. In addition to being an adviser to Mexicos Institute for Mexicans Abroad  an official cabinet-level body established by Fox  Reyna is a prominent leader in Utahs Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. Last fall, he was appointed deputy mayor of Ogden, Utahs fourth-largest city and home to a large and growing Mexican population.

Ogden is currently the only Utah city to have a deputy mayor, and almost certainly the only one to have hired an agent of the Mexican government. This individual, who draws a salary from Utah citizens, is acting on behalf of a foreign government and publicly defaming those of us seeking to uphold our state and national laws, states Throckmorton. Interestingly, Reyna was one of only 40 Hispanic leaders invited to attend the Washington announcement of George W. Bushs proposed illegal alien amnesty, reported the January 8 Deseret Morning News.

Also in attendance at the announcement was Representative Cannon, one of the Houses most outspoken amnesty supporters and an advocate of political and economic convergence with Mexico. Toward that end, Cannon helped create the U.S.-Mexico Political Caucus in March 2003. We love immigrants in Utah, gushed Rep. Cannon at a June 6, 2002 gathering of the Mexican-American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF), a foundation-funded radical group. And we dont oftentimes make the distinction between legal and illegal. In fact I think Utah was the first state in the country to legislate the ability to get a drivers license based on the matricula consular [card] and of that I am proud. Rep. Cannon was on hand to receive MALDEFs Excellence in Leadership Award.

Representative Cannon is commonly perceived to be the Bush administrations point man on immigration, Matt Throckmorton (who is, recall, running against Cannon) told THE NEW AMERICAN. Cannon is considered to be politically secure, since he represents the most Republican district in what may be the most Republican state in the country. I believe that the White House is using Cannon to advance its open borders agenda out of the belief that he can do so without causing adverse political repercussions for the party. Throckmorton asserts that Cannons office was deeply involved in derailing HB 109.

Viva Mexico!

Complicating matters in the torpedoing of HB 109 were the Mexican governments complaints aired to the states most prominent church, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (commonly known as the LDS Church, or the Mormon Church). Mexican officials claimed that an activist from UFIRE had insinuated LDS Church support for HB 109. Members of a Latino task force, concerned about the churchs position on the legislation, [met with] officials from the LDS Church to ask the states most powerful institution to take a stand against proposed legislation that could prohibit the use of a Mexican identification card in Utah, reported the February 26 Salt Lake Tribune.

LDS church spokesman George Monsivais attended the February 26 press conference to give the churchs official position. At the conference, the church issued a public statement that it doesnt want to be part of the debate over a bill the Mexican government says is blatant discrimination, reported Salt Lakes KSL-TV. The church repeated its oft-stated caution to members that they should never infer that the church endorses their personal political positions, stated the February 27 Deseret Morning News. Monsivais also stated that the church is investigating complaints [that] Utahns For Immigration Reform and Enforcement are citing church teachings as apparent justification for their political purposes.

We did have one board member make some unwise statements implying more than was justified, UFIRE leader Throckmorton told THE NEW AMERICAN. Its true that LDS doctrine affirms the need to uphold and sustain the law, and we believe that this includes immigration laws. But as a group we never sought to involve the church in this debate.

The Utah media characterized the churchs politically neutral position as harming the bill. For example, the March 4 Deseret Morning News opined, What life the [bill] did have may have been taken [on February 26] when The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, in a public statement, took no position on the bill and warned UFIRE representatives not to imply otherwise. The measure died in committee despite being supported by the overwhelming majority of Utahns.

The death of HB 109 prompted an exultant celebration on the part of the states illegal alien lobby. What started out as a call to action on Spanish language radio, became a concerted and noticeable lobbying effort by the Hispanic community that was capped off by an impromptu 10:30 p.m. rally in the Capitol Rotunda just as the House adjourned, reported the paper. The rally was punctuated by boisterous cheers from the hundreds of Hispanics.... Alex Segura, who was on hand to witness the rally, added one critical detail: Many of those gathered in the Rotunda were waving Mexican flags and chanting Viva Mexico!

Demographic Warfare

The defeat of HB 109 in Utah was a critical victory for Mexico in its campaign of demographic warfare against our nation. Utah, remember, was the first state to allow illegal aliens to use matricula cards to obtain drivers licenses. Had Utah reversed course on this issue, its likely that other states would have followed suit. And Utah is just one of numerous states to witness such brazen, unabashed political meddling by the Mexican government  and occasional harassment of immigration reform activists.

Several years ago, Teodoro Maus, then Mexican consul-general in Atlanta, joined with local Hispanic activists in demanding the resignation of Norman Bingham, chairman of the Cobb County (Georgia) Board of Education. His supposed offense was making some admittedly intemperate remarks about uneducated illegal aliens working in the local construction industry. Bingham kept his position but was forced to issue a two-page formal apology. Maus also demanded and received an apology from a local radio talk-show host who had suggested militarizing the border between the U.S. and Mexico; attacked a city ordinance in Smyrna requiring that all commercial signs be written in English; demanded that illegal Mexican immigrants be issued drivers licenses; and agitated against the declaration of English as the states official language.

The office of Sergio Aguilera Beteta, Mexican consul-general in Indianapolis, has publicly humiliated Mexican nationals here who do not share Vicente Foxs goal of subverting our immigration laws and trashing our national sovereignty, reports Dave Gorak of the Midwest Coalition to Reduce Immigration. One such traitor is Esther Tapia Barber, who has lived in Indianapolis since 1997 after arriving legally from Mexico to marry retired police officer Bob Barber.

Mrs. Barber is active in her local Mexican-American community. She and her husband are strong advocates of reforming our immigration system. Like millions of others who obey our laws and patiently work through our naturalization system, she has found herself pushed to the back of the queue by illegal aliens and their allies. Last November, Esther learned that a representative of consul-general Aguilera had contacted a local cemetery and instructed them to dis-invite her from the annual Day of the Dead Festival, a Mexican cultural event at which she had intended to sell home-made merchandise.

To their credit, cemetery officials ignored that arrogant request, and Esther attended in the company of two friends. During the event, the consul-general himself confronted Esther in person and (according to an eyewitness account) spat out the following malediction: Arent you ashamed to show your face at this celebration, when your husband has been slandering Mexico and the Mexican people? During an interview on a Hispanic radio program a few days later, Ricardo Gambetta, director of the Indianapolis Latino Affairs Commission, publicly denounced the Barbers as anti-Mexican bigots.

Esther Barber, who expects to become an American citizen this year, has written to Vicente Fox and the State Department to protest [the consul-generals] conduct, reports Gorak. But the Fox regime is more interested in subverting our laws than in reining in its rogue diplomats  and the State Department has shown no interest in impeding Mexicos subversive campaign.

Since January of last year, Mexicos consular offices across the U.S. have issued roughly 1.4 million identification cards  known as matriculas consulares  to its nationals in the U.S., mostly undocumented immigrants who dont have access to other ID, reported the October 3 Wall Street Journal. More than 1,000 local police departments recognize the cards, and in more than a dozen states they can be used to get drivers licenses. Seeing immigrants as a potential new market, roughly 280 financial institutions in the U.S. accept the matricula to open bank accounts.

Last July, responding to congressional concerns, the Treasury Department opened a period of public comment on banking rules allowing use of the matricula; negative comments immediately outpaced positive ones by more than a two-to-one ratio. However, behind the scenes, the Mexican government itself did a lot of work to support the card, mobilizing the Mexican immigrant community in the U.S. to push for a favorable decision, noted the Journal.

That campaign  drawing heavily on groups such as MALDEF, the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce and the National Immigration Law Center  was coordinated by the Institute for Mexicans Abroad (IME). They have done a masterful job, quietly and methodically, admitted Congressman Elton Gallegly (R-Calif.), an outspoken opponent of the matricula cards, who estimates that Mexico spent millions of dollars in its lobbying efforts.

Mexico is mounting an even larger effort on behalf of George W. Bushs amnesty proposal. The Mexican government is lobbying U.S. lawmakers and civic leaders for amnesty or guest-worker status for millions of illegal aliens now in the United States, working through a coalition of U.S.-based immigration rights associations, Mexican-American organizations and grass-roots Hispanic groups, reported the March 4 Washington Times. Spearheading this campaign once again is the IME.

The IME is composed mainly of Mexican-Americans residing in this country. The body claims a mandate to represent the interests of Mexicans and Mexican-Americans residing here  both legal and illegal immigrants, as well as legal resident aliens, naturalized citizens, and even native-born Americans of Mexican ancestry. Each individual selected for the IME, noted the November 25, 2002 Chicago Tribune, becomes a formal part of President Vicente Foxs government.

On several occasions, both Fox and his predecessor, Ernesto Zedillo, have referred to a Mexican nation extending beyond that countrys northern border. Speaking at a 1994 convention of the National Council of La Raza (a foundation-funded radical Hispanic lobby), Zedillo declared, you are Mexicans too, you just live in the United States. On another occasion, Zedillo denounced attempts by the United States to enforce our immigration laws, insisting that we will not tolerate foreign forces dictating laws to Mexicans. In a similar vein, Fox and his administration have repeatedly referred to a population of 23 million Mexicans living in the U.S.  a figure that includes U.S.-born Mexican-American citizens.

The Mexican government has been similarly brazen in forging links with radical Hispanic lobbies and other street-level militants, thereby creating a classic fifth column in our nation:

The November 23, 2002 Houston Post reported: Mexicos foreign minister, Jorge Castañeda, said his country would begin a bottom-up campaign to win U.S. public support for a proposal to legalize 3.5 million undocumented Mexican workers in the United States. Castañeda said Mexican officials will begin rallying unions, churches, universities and Mexican communities. Whats important is that American society sees a possible migratory agreement in a positive light, said Castañeda. We are already giving instructions to our consulates that they begin propagating militant activities  if you will  in their communities. (Emphasis added.)

In a 2002 address to LULAC, Castañeda praised the group for its lobbying efforts. Reported the June 27, 2002 Houston Post, the then-Mexican foreign minister noted that by lobbying local governments in the United States, the Mexican government has managed to make it easier for illegal immigrants to live a more normal life.

A year ago, the leadership of LULAC held high-level meetings with key Mexican officials in Mexico City, according to a March 4, 2003 press release from the group. The chief issue under discussion at those talks was, predictably, amnesty for illegal aliens.

In late 2001, the Mexican Consulate in San Francisco issued what it called Golden Rules for Undocumented Immigrants in the U.S. Illegal aliens were urged in that document to contact your nearest Consulate immediately upon arrival. The Consulate has people designated specifically for the protection and defense of the human and labor rights of its foreign nationals. Other advice is given on how illegals can live discreet lives and take advantage of public services and benefits.

In Houston the Mexican consulate has joined a consortium (which includes representatives of the U.S. Department of Labor, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and MALDEF) to educate and counsel immigrants who believe theyve been discriminated against, havent been paid the proper wages, or are having immigration problems.

Beginning in 1998, Mexico changed its constitution to allow dual citizenship. This permits Mexican dual citizens living in the U.S. to participate in Mexican elections, both as candidates and voters.

In 1994, the Mexican Consulate in Los Angeles organized a massive demonstration against Proposition 187, a referendum seeking to cut off non-critical welfare benefits to illegal aliens. At that protest, hundreds of thousands of Mexicans marched behind the Mexican flag to demand that American taxpayers continue to subsidize benefits for those who break our immigration laws.

An Ongoing Invasion

By any rational reckoning, Mexico is conducting an invasion, occupation and colonization of our country, with the complicity of our own government.

A peaceful mass of people carries out slowly and patiently an unstoppable invasion, the most important in human history, wrote columnist Carlos Loret de Mola for Mexico Citys Excelsior newspaper in 1982. You cannot give me a similar example of such a large migratory wave by an ant-like multitude, stubborn, unarmed, and carried on in the face of the most powerful and best-armed nation on earth.... [Neither] barbed-wire fences, nor aggressive border guards, nor campaigns, nor laws, nor police raids against the undocumented, have stopped this movement of the masses that is unprecedented in any part of the world.According to Loret, the migrant invasion seems to be slowly returning [the southwestern United States] to the jurisdiction of Mexico without the firing of a single shot, nor requiring the least diplomatic action, by means of a steady, spontaneous, and uninterrupted occupation.

When Loret published those words 22 years ago, few reasonable people could have imagined the transformation that has since taken place in the U.S. Southwest. Its doubtful that many observers could have anticipated the 1986 amnesty that entrenched millions of illegal aliens in our nation, and opened the doors to millions more. For that matter, its most unlikely that anyone could have foreseen the day when the Mexican government would be able to demand that a state legislature continue to grant drivers licenses and other benefits to illegal aliens, as it just did in Utah.

The invasion and occupation of America by Mexico (to use Lorets provocative but correct terminology) is hardly spontaneous. It is supported and encouraged by the Mexican government and passively abetted by our own.

I have proudly affirmed that the Mexican nation extends beyond the territory enclosed by its borders, declared then-Mexican President Ernesto Zedillo at a 1997 conference of La Raza. We have recognized that the Mexican population is 100 million in Mexico and the 23 million who live in the United States, asserted Juan Hernandez, the dual national who was the first chief of the IME, in a 2001 interview. We are a united nation.

There are several million Mexican people in the United States, Hernandez commented in an interview with HispanicOnline. These individuals need to be legalized, they need to be able to come home and see their families and not have to cross a dangerous border.... (Emphasis added.)

The ongoing immigration invasion is gradually eradicating the border while creating a Mexican nation within our nation. And the U.S. government, instead of thwarting these developments, is actually encouraging the invasion from the South. Take, for just one example, the following statement made by President George W. Bush on August 24, 2001:

There are people in Mexico who have got children who are worried about where they are going to get their next meal from. And they are going to come to the United States, if they think they can make money here. Thats a simple fact. And theyre willing to walk across miles of desert to do work that some Americans wont do. And weve got to respect that, it seems like to me, and treat those people with respect.

On January 7 of this year, President Bush proposed his amnesty program (which, he claimed, was not amnesty) to grant legal status, as temporary workers, to the millions of undocumented [read: illegal] men and women now employed in the United States, and to those in foreign countries who seek to participate in the program and have been offered employment here. Not surprisingly, Bushs proposal caused an immediate increase in the flood of illegals who cross our borders every day.

Speaking at his Crawford, Texas, ranch during a March 6 joint press conference with Vicente Fox, Mr. Bush described the U.S. and Mexico as partners in building a safer, more democratic and more prosperous hemisphere. He even praised cooperation between Mexico and American border and law enforcement  as if the Mexican government shared the desire of most Americans to restore our nations borders.

The cruel reality is that the Bush and Fox administrations are indeed partners: They seek the amalgamation of our nations as part of a long-term design to create a hemisphere-wide superstate modeled on the European Union.* This is why the same Bush administration that was willing to wage a pre-emptive war against an entirely hypothetical threat from distant Iraq is permitting  and even encouraging  Mexico to continue its campaign of demographic warfare and cultural subversion against us.

Don't feel bad they have taken over Nevada as well. The jobs they hold are not jobs Americans don't want. Americans are on the streets well illegal immegrants are working, collecting welfare, food stamps and free medical. Grants, cars and homes that we pay for. Many homes are packed with illegals and than they are spread out. The US Post Office makes so much money they can give up new postal trucks to Mexicans to convert invert into Ice Cream trucks. The US postal service is making fools out of Americans, they keep raising the postal rates and we keep paying it,WHY? It's time to cut the postal rates and the pay checks of of many postal workers. The US postal service has become a billion dollar scam. Henderson,NV has 4 US, tax payer postal trucks delivering ice cream the last time I was there.

This is why the same Bush administration that was willing to wage a pre-emptive war against an entirely hypothetical threat from distant Iraq is permitting  and even encouraging  Mexico to continue its campaign of demographic warfare and cultural subversion against us.

Since border crossing apprehensions are down 40 percent under Bush I will take this mongering with a grain of salt.

Since border crossing apprehensions are down 40 percent under Bush I will take this mongering with a grain of salt.

What are you smoking? Apprehensions are down under the Bush administration because Bush quit enforcing the laws. At this time US citizens can place the blame squarely on Bush's shoulders for our failings in this farce.

My guess is that if Bush loses the coming election it will be principally do to his policy on immigration. Bush's January 9 policy is simply obscene and the US public knows it. It weakens his credibility on all other issues.

I'll give you a source. How about checking with the organization of Border Patrol Agents. They'll tell you everything you want to know about the travesty. They are being undermined at every turn. As a matter of fact, stop a Border Patrol Agent yourself sometime and ask them if the Bush Administration is serious about stopping illegal immigration. You people ought to open your eyes before you can't get a job in your own country anymore.

In fact, why not stop ANY police officer in just about any jurisdiction and ask him/her what happens when they stop illegals and call the Immigration and Naturalization Service.

Its not a "Stealth Invasion"..... its right out in the open....its their target that has been hobbled and blinded by the quislings in charge.....

When the liberals and conservatives tell you its not an invasion and holds the door open for them...and tells you ...you are a 'tin foil' head for even noticing....when you are not supposed to pay any attention to the man behind the curtain....

Since border crossing apprehensions are down 40 percent under Bush I will take this mongering with a grain of salt.

Bush did not cause the decrease in apprehensions, Al Quada did.

Apprehensions were up 7% in Bush's first 9 months, then 9/11 happened and people got scared and did not come to the US. As that fear eases, the number will increase again.

No new immigration enforcement policy went into effect until 09/11/2002. By then, apprehensions were already down 25%. We had another large drop in 2002 and only a 3% drop in 2003. Ill bet 2004 shows an increase.

Most of the new policies went into effect in 2003, and that is the year that the decreased nearly stopped.

Also, just because apprehensions are down, does not necessarily mean there is also a decrease in illegal border crossing. Apprehensions are just the only semi reliable means of estimating illegal entries.

Even if we assume that a percent decrease in apprehensions means and equal percent decrease in illegal entries then we can also assume that the apprehension ratio is the same and approximately 2.7 million illegals still got past the Border Patrol in 2003.

Under Bushs watch, there have been 4,714,270 apprehensions. Being nice, Ill use a 33% apprehension rate.

Approximately 9,428,540 illegal aliens have snuck into the US under Bushs watch.

16
posted on 03/24/2004 3:06:39 PM PST
by Marine Inspector
(Either we will defeat terrorism, or terrorism will defeat us.)

Apprehensions are down under the Bush administration because Bush quit enforcing the laws.

Bush no more enforces the immigration laws then Clinton did. The President does not enforce immigration law, he appoints people who will. His first appointment, Zigler, was a complete and under failure, Bonner is much better, but has to run things through Asa Hutchinson and Ridge, both idiots in my book.

No, apprehensions are down because of 9/11. Illegal aliens feared they would be thought of as terrorists. As that fear ebbs, the apprehensions will increase. 2004 will be that year.

19
posted on 03/24/2004 3:22:21 PM PST
by Marine Inspector
(Either we will defeat terrorism, or terrorism will defeat us.)

The invasion and occupation of America by Mexico (to use Lorets provocative but correct terminology) is hardly spontaneous. It is supported and encouraged by the Mexican government and passively abetted by our own.

But I'm sure this story will have a happy ending. It always works out so well to shove 2 cultures with 2 languages and loyalties to 2 different governments into the same space. It worked so well in ancient Rome, last century in Europe, and these days in Kosovo.

Apprehensions are down because the INS work force was diverted by 911. Not because illegal immigration subsided. Illegal immigration is now above pre 911 levels. Bush's January 9 pronouncement opened the flood gates, albeit an uninformed basis from the standpoint of the immigrant.

Bush's announcement created such a rush that within 6 weeks Ridge had to shore up the border patrol to fight the flood.

Did Bush do anything worse than his father or Clinton prior to 911? No. But that's not an excuse for his behavior. Prior to 911 there were symptoms appearing all over the southwestern US that the flood of illegal aliens was sapping the state infrastructures and Bush did nothing.

Post 911 Bush's posture has simply been inexcusable. He has singlehandedly done more, either through implied invitation or inaction that any other US president to accelerate illegal immigration in just 3 short years.

Other than the politically motivated raid on WalMart, there have been no "residential roundups", the most effective tool in our immigration arsenal, since 1987. This is the first program I would have expected a conservative president to reinstate post 911 if for nothing more than its domestic public relations value.

After September 11, 2001, the World Trade Center was destroyed with a massive loss of lives, and our nations borders were still wide open.

The President called for all citizens to be vigilant in a time of war for unusual suspicious activities and people. In Southern Arizona from Cochise County to the Tohoho O'odham Indian Reservation, multi-thousands of illegals crossed into the United States, narcotics shipments were intercepted and the U.S. Border Patrol was undermanned and over run. Prompted by the dangling carrot of political promises, border law enforcement tries to stem the tide, and politicians actively encourage illegal immigration. It's a no win situation with no end in sight.

The guest worker plan, which amounts to stealth Amnesty was proposed by Arizona Conservative leaders and announced by President Bush in December 2003. The Border Patrol and local law enforcement agencies were overwhelmed. Crimes against citizens increased.

Recently, the President in a concession to Mexico's political wishes has allowed all people with a valid Border Crossing Cards to enter the U.S. without being fingerprinted which leaves the door wide open for fraudulent entries, criminals to terrorists.

The Guest Worker program is not workable unless current laws on the books are strictly enforced with enough Border and interior Agents to do the job. The fiasco of 1986 was a miserable failure which cost taxpayers about 78 million dollars over the first ten years and failed to solve any illegal immigration problems. Chain migrations increased and illegals from around the world continued to enter unchallenged. Employer sanctions and fines was a good idea " if " Congress had allowed the I&NS to hire a small army of investigators with no other purpose than to insure Companies and Industries compiled with the law. The amount of fines for repeat offenders would have brought millions of dollars back into the treasury and curtailed the constant illegal invasion. Political promises of jobs for the world's population now only adds to an already uncontrollable situation as smugglers compete for human cargo.

Politicians over the past several decades have played a key role in the current Immigration mess. It just didn't happen over night. It's easier to create a new Agency or renew a failed past policy than solve the problem. There are currently 350,000 illegal aliens that have deportation orders that have absconded and are still in the United States while thousands continue to enter the U.S. daily in the South West.

In fact, why not stop ANY police officer in just about any jurisdiction and ask him/her what happens when they stop illegals and call the Immigration and Naturalization Service.

The INS will laugh at you. They will not come out. I was an LEO, I know. It is evidently not a law violation to be illegally in this country to the INS...or to a few so-called "conservatives" on this forum.

I'm guessing you backed McClintock and I made you mad. I'm ok with that. He would have lost, as I'm afraid Jones will, too.A "forum vetran" like you should know that.Enjoy the next 4 years on FreeRepublic:)

You were right all along: America must accept the invasion and learn to accept the Aztlan concept. You must be happy to know you were on the winning side all along despite all of our clinging to outdated tradition. Where can I meet you to apologize for all my wrongful slurs on your reputation and obviously superior knowledge?

Apprehensions are down because the INS work force was diverted by 911. Not because illegal immigration subsided.

I am the INS work force. How was I diverted?

Illegal immigration is now above pre 911 levels.

No, it's still below 9/11 levels. In FY 2000, apprehensions were at 1.6 million. In FY 2001, apprehensions were down to 1.2 million and then 9/11 happened.

In FY 2002, apprehensions were down to 929,809 and in FY 2003 they drop another 3% to 905,065.

Sorry, but, fewwer folks were crossing in FY 2002 and 2003.

Bush's January 9 pronouncement opened the flood gates That has yet to be determined. Januarys apprehensions were well below normal for this time of year, although, I agree that it will increase the numbers and this year, 2004, will be the first year we will see an increase since FY 2000.

Bush's announcement created such a rush that within 6 weeks Ridge had to shore up the border patrol to fight the flood.

Sorry, that program, the Arizona Border Control Initiative has been in the making for almost a year. Long before Bushs proposal.

Did Bush do anything worse than his father or Clinton prior to 911? No. But that's not an excuse for his behavior. Prior to 911 there were symptoms appearing all over the southwestern US that the flood of illegal aliens was sapping the state infrastructures and Bush did nothing.

This is the culmination of almost 4 decades of bad immigration policy. The fault belongs to Ted Kennedy (for his 1965 immigration act) and every President that was in office after JFK.

Post 911 Bush's posture has simply been inexcusable. He has singlehandedly done more, either through implied invitation or inaction that any other US president to accelerate illegal immigration in just 3 short years.

Yes, Bush has failed on the immigration issue, but illegal immigration has not accelerated in the past 3 years. Sorry, but that is the truth. It was in decline from its peak in FY 2000. 9/11 actually helped that decline, but it will be short lived. Will apprehensions ever reach the 1.6 million mark set in FY 2000, I doubt it, but I will bet that they pass the 1 million mark in 2004.

Other than the politically motivated raid on WalMart, there have been no "residential roundups", the most effective tool in our immigration arsenal, since 1987. This is the first program I would have expected a conservative president to reinstate post 911 if for nothing more than its domestic public relations value.

WalMart was a Worksite Enforcement action, not a Residential Roundup. I can guaranty you will never see a residential roundup by ICE or CBP. Americans and probably you, would be highly upset if we started going door to door in your neiborhood.

And yes, Worksite Enforcement is severely lacking and it has been since Reagan, they have done more then just WalMart. They average about 75 each year. Just because it is not in the news, does not mean it is not happening.

38
posted on 03/26/2004 7:06:24 AM PST
by Marine Inspector
(Either we will defeat terrorism, or terrorism will defeat us.)

WalMart was a Worksite Enforcement action, not a Residential Roundup. I can guaranty you will never see a residential roundup by ICE or CBP. Americans and probably you, would be highly upset if we started going door to door in your neiborhood.

If I saw ICE hauling illegals out of houses on MY street, never to return, I think I might be able to get over it.

An attempt to equate apprehension rates with immigration rates is a weak argument at best because apprehension rates are more affected by will and manpower than available targets. Yes, even a blind cat can occasionally catch a bird but if he's being kept indoors his chances are severely reduced.

Of course the apprehension ability of the INS was diminished by 911 because personnel were diverted from other tasks to secure our immediate borders and assist other agencies in their hunt for sleeper cells in the US. Interest in pursuing Mexicans took a distance back seat to preventing further illegal entry/overstay of radical Muslims and ferreting out those members of the domestic Muslim community bent on our destruction.

Any suggestion that programs "long in the works" weren't accelerated by the consequences of Bush's pronouncements are charitable at best and misleading at worst. Ridge's announcement was predicted and expected by many. The fact the he dug into his back pocket and produced an "existing" program to provide political cover surprises no one.

From my perspective Ronald Reagan set the stage in the mid 80's for today's farce. His decision to temporarily decriminalize illegal entry was one of the few regrets that he publicly voiced over the eight years of his administration. That Bush didn't learn from Reagan's publicly professed mistakes is bothersome.

Your response of "worksite enforcement" is an odd but not unexpected response. I'm not talking about "work-site enforcement". I'm talking about "residential sweeps". I'm talking about driving into a neighborhood, based on a citizen's complaint or surveillance, and simply starting a door to door search. I appreciate that in a PC world this procedure would come as a shock to INS personnel ("You can't do that!" Aliens have rights!" etc.) but it was, and still could be the most cost effective tool in our inventory. Aliens would think twice about coming if they knew they were going to subject to harrassment and deportation 24/7.

It was so in the 1950's. It can be so again today. It just takes an administration with core principals and balls. Most agents I know would comply if given the order. They are tired of the wasted cycle of chasing the importers and paying a fond greeting to the import.

The strategy to defend a small strip along the border will never be economically effective unless there is a public willingness and approval to kill men, women and children within that zone. The revolving door of apprehension and repatriation increases the learning curve of the immigrant faster than that of the INS. A system of apprehension and incarceration would be an economic monster that we would all regret.

Our problems today at the borders are being addressed as well as can be expected under the prevailing mood at the federal and state level but the interior is being ignored and the safety of the interior is the lure for illegal immigrants. Deny the sanctuary of the interior and the high risk at the border will extinguish the lust to cross

Could you get over it, if the knocked on your door and demanded to know the citizenship of everyone in your house and demanded proof?

Well, let's see. I can speak english, not "engrish" I have a valid Texas DL, a FCC issued ham radio license, a birth cert that I can show in less than 30 seconds. Along with a CCL which will explain the Glock 21 that is usually parked in a cross-draw on my front left. All of this would be in full view of the living room gun safe, usually open when I am at home indicating that if anyone has any FURTHER questions, I retain the right of first refusal, so to speak.

In this issue of national security, I would be more than happy to flash a DL on request at my front door if ICE would haul off the %!*%@& illegals on the block, thank you.

. An attempt to equate apprehension rates with immigration rates is a weak argument at best because apprehension rates are more affected by will and manpower than available targets. Yes, even a blind cat can occasionally catch a bird but if he's being kept indoors his chances are severely reduced.

And how would you estimate illegal immigration? Every expert in the field of illegal immigration uses the apprehension number to estimate the numbers that get through. If you have a better way, please let me know.

Of course the apprehension ability of the INS was diminished by 911 because personnel were diverted from other tasks to secure our immediate borders and assist other agencies in their hunt for sleeper cells in the US.

Could you cite your sources on this? I work for the agency that secures our border and no Border Patrol Agent or Immigration Inspector was diverted to look for sleeper cells in the US or assist any other agency. In fact, other agencies were sent to assist us. Our apprehension ability was increased, not decreased.

Interest in pursuing Mexicans took a distance back seat to preventing further illegal entry/overstay of radical Muslims and ferreting out those members of the domestic Muslim community bent on our destruction.

Youre partially correct. Interior enforcement shifted their focus from illegal aliens to Muslim terrorists, but the Border Patrol and Immigration Inspectors had the exact same focus as before. Apprehending illegal aliens.

Any suggestion that programs "long in the works" weren't accelerated by the consequences of Bush's pronouncements are charitable at best and misleading at worst.

Wrong again. I work for CBP. I knew about the program and its rollout date, prior to Bushs announcement. It was not accelerated by Bushs announcement.

From my perspective Ronald Reagan set the stage in the mid 80's for today's farce. His decision to temporarily decriminalize illegal entry was one of the few regrets that he publicly voiced over the eight years of his administration. That Bush didn't learn from Reagan's publicly professed mistakes is bothersome.

The problem started long before Reagan, but yes, he was forced to do something he knew was wrong. Bush 1 did not fix it, Clinton did not fix it, Bush wont fix it (although he has done more then the others in some aspects) and no foreseeable President will have the political will to fix it.

Your response of "worksite enforcement" is an odd but not unexpected response. I'm not talking about "work-site enforcement". I'm talking about "residential sweeps". I'm talking about driving into a neighborhood, based on a citizen's complaint or surveillance, and simply starting a door to door search. I appreciate that in a PC world this procedure would come as a shock to INS personnel ("You can't do that!" Aliens have rights!" etc.) but it was, and still could be the most cost effective tool in our inventory. Aliens would think twice about coming if they knew they were going to subject to harrassment and deportation 24/7.

Wrong again. We, in immigration enforcement would not be adverse to doing just that, unfortunately, the vast majority of American citizens would blow a gasket if we did. It happened already, here in Arizona. Your average American does not want us going door-to-door looking for illegals.

It was so in the 1950's. It can be so again today. It just takes an administration with core principals and balls.

And no such administration exists or ever will, at least not in my lifetime.

Most agents I know would comply if given the order. They are tired of the wasted cycle of chasing the importers and paying a fond greeting to the import.

Your right, we would. But it wont happen, so we dont dwell on fantasies.

The strategy to defend a small strip along the border will never be economically effective unless there is a public willingness and approval to kill men, women and children within that zone.

Agreed, but the public will never be willing to do that, and they wont be willing to have us knock on there doors weekly looking for illegals.

The revolving door of apprehension and repatriation increases the learning curve of the immigrant faster than that of the INS. A system of apprehension and incarceration would be an economic monster that we would all regret.

Youre preaching to the choir.

Our problems today at the borders are being addressed as well as can be expected under the prevailing mood at the federal and state level but the interior is being ignored and the safety of the interior is the lure for illegal immigrants. Deny the sanctuary of the interior and the high risk at the border will extinguish the lust to cross

You are correct, but this administration will not enforce the interior nor stop the welfare state.

None of this changes the fact the less people are crossing the border today, then when Bush took office.

In the past, illegals would cross over, work a few months and then head back to Mexico. They would repeat this process when the needed money. The permanent illegal alien population grew slowly. This is what happened during the 80s and 90s.

As we increased enforcement along the border, the illegals changed their tactics. Instead of returning to Mexico, more and more are staying here, so they dont risk being caught, thus decreasing the number of border crossers, but increasing the permanent illegal alien population. This is what happened in the late 90s until now.

This caused another phenomenon. In the past, your average illegal was a young working age males. They left the family in Mexico, came and worked and returned home. Now, since they are staying here in the US, they send for their families to join them. Over the past decade, the number of children and women has increased dramatically.

The only way to stop what is happening is to stop all welfare to illegals and jail any American that hires an illegal. Once the jobs and welfare dry up, the illegals will head home on their own.

45
posted on 03/26/2004 2:54:45 PM PST
by Marine Inspector
(Either we will defeat terrorism, or terrorism will defeat us.)

I believe that presented with a choice of show your ID at your front door one time and the illegals are on the big green bus south and not keeping you up at night, stealing your lawnmower, throwing trash in the alley, not ignoring their dogs needing to be treated for fleas and ticks, not leaving 2 junk cars in the back yard, not acting like they don't understand you at the g-store where your kid can't GET a job despite the fact that he goes to the same school as these jerks, not running down your property values, not hanging out in gangs on the street till 3 am, not pi$$ing in your bushes on the side of your house, not yelling at your wife, not parking their cars in front of YOUR house, etc etc . . . . most folks will take that opportunity to, thinking of ALL those wonderful memories, gleefully take the 15 seconds to smile next to their crummy DL photo.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.